4.1 Article

Manipulating municipal budgets: unveiling opportunistic behavior of Italian mayors

期刊

PUBLIC CHOICE
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11127-023-01131-3

关键词

Local political budget cycle; Real estate tax; Waste disposal tariffs; Clientelism; Fiscal manipulation; Electoral incentives; C23; D72; H20; H71

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the political budget cycle hypothesis using revenue data from Italian municipal administrations. The findings suggest that mayors engage in opportunistic behavior in pre-election years, but this behavior is influenced by term limits. Mayors also strategically offset reductions in salient fees and taxes by increasing non-tax revenues.
We examine the political budget cycle hypothesis using revenue data from Italian municipal administrations. By leveraging on the staggered schedule of local elections and employing a difference-in-differences strategy, we find evidence of opportunistic behavior by mayors. In pre-election years, mayors reduce total accrued revenues from municipal solid waste fees and property taxes, which are the primary sources of revenue in municipal financial statements. Non-term-limited mayors who seek re-election engage in such opportunistic behavior, while those facing a binding term limit do not manipulate revenues for electoral purposes. Our findings remain robust across various specifications and controls. Heterogeneity analysis suggests that the observed results are primarily driven by smaller municipalities, as well as by those situated in the South of Italy that exhibit low levels of social capital. Mayors employing political budget cycles also strategically offset reductions in highly salient fees and taxes by raising less salient non-tax revenues. This study contributes to the understanding of political budget cycles in the context of Italian municipal administrations and has implications for the broader literature on electoral behavior and public finance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据